I named specific and well-known forms of bias (observer
bias and survivor bias). I did not invent these insights,
I'm just applying them.
You can hardly expect researchers to discard all data just
because Jym Dyer thinks it might be invalid!

=v= You keep rewording this into _ad_hominem_ blather about
me. All this conveys is that you have nothing of substance
to offer about the points I'm raising.
_Jym_

Jym Dyer wrote:
I named specific and well-known forms of bias (observer
bias and survivor bias). I did not invent these insights,
I'm just applying them.
You can hardly expect researchers to discard all data just
because Jym Dyer thinks it might be invalid!

=v= You keep rewording this into _ad_hominem_ blather about
me. All this conveys is that you have nothing of substance
to offer about the points I'm raising.
_Jym_

We can leave your name out if it, Jym. That won't change much. You (or
anyone else) can hardly expect researchers to discard all data just
because one person somewhere thinks it might be invalid, no matter what
his name is.

What part of the Phoenix data do you think is invalid? What evidence do
you have that it's invalid? What should the correct figures be? Here's
that data again: http://phoenix.gov/STREETS/2007bike.pdf